Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 0/2] Re-add piglit to sdk images

2016-10-19 Thread Richard Purdie 
On Wed, 2016-10-19 at 16:02 +0200, Mike Looijmans wrote:
> On 19-10-16 14:53, Burton, Ross wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 18 October 2016 at 22:21, Paul Eggleton  > el.com
> > > wrote:
> > 
> > > > Q: Do I need to declare a runtime dependency that typically
> > comes
> > > > from busybox (tar)?
> > >
> > > Yes, because some people try to eliminate busybox from their
> > image.
> > 
> > How would one express such a dependency though, given that it
> > could come from
> > tar or busybox? "Virtual" runtime dependencies aren't allowed
> > except through
> > our somewhat awkward VIRTUAL-RUNTIME convention, but that
> > probably isn't
> > warranted here.
> > 
> > busybox could RRPOVIDE tar?
> If we go down that road, we'd end up with a busybox that RPROVIDES a
> hundred 
> and one utilities. I doubt anyone will be happy with that...

We've come across this problem before. It is something which is
probably worth looking at to see what options we have but it is
probably a tangential issue to the patch at hand.

Cheers,

Richard
-- 
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 0/2] Re-add piglit to sdk images

2016-10-19 Thread Burton, Ross 
On 19 October 2016 at 15:02, Mike Looijmans  wrote:

> busybox could RRPOVIDE tar?
>>
>
> If we go down that road, we'd end up with a busybox that RPROVIDES a
> hundred and one utilities. I doubt anyone will be happy with that...
>

Well, only for the utilities which are separately packaged and generally
swapped around. ie it wouldn't need to RPROVIDE "ls".

Ross
-- 
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 0/2] Re-add piglit to sdk images

2016-10-19 Thread Mike Looijmans 

On 19-10-16 14:53, Burton, Ross wrote:


On 18 October 2016 at 22:21, Paul Eggleton > wrote:

> > Q: Do I need to declare a runtime dependency that typically comes
> > from busybox (tar)?
>
> Yes, because some people try to eliminate busybox from their image.

How would one express such a dependency though, given that it could come 
from
tar or busybox? "Virtual" runtime dependencies aren't allowed except through
our somewhat awkward VIRTUAL-RUNTIME convention, but that probably isn't
warranted here.

busybox could RRPOVIDE tar?


If we go down that road, we'd end up with a busybox that RPROVIDES a hundred 
and one utilities. I doubt anyone will be happy with that...



Kind regards,

Mike Looijmans
System Expert

TOPIC Products
Materiaalweg 4, NL-5681 RJ Best
Postbus 440, NL-5680 AK Best
Telefoon: +31 (0) 499 33 69 79
E-mail: mike.looijm...@topicproducts.com
Website: www.topicproducts.com

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail





--
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 0/2] Re-add piglit to sdk images

2016-10-19 Thread Burton, Ross 
On 18 October 2016 at 22:21, Paul Eggleton 
wrote:

> > > Q: Do I need to declare a runtime dependency that typically comes
> > > from busybox (tar)?
> >
> > Yes, because some people try to eliminate busybox from their image.
>
> How would one express such a dependency though, given that it could come
> from
> tar or busybox? "Virtual" runtime dependencies aren't allowed except
> through
> our somewhat awkward VIRTUAL-RUNTIME convention, but that probably isn't
> warranted here.
>

busybox could RRPOVIDE tar?

Ross
-- 
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 0/2] Re-add piglit to sdk images

2016-10-18 Thread Paul Eggleton 
On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:13:11 Randy MacLeod wrote:
> On 2016-10-14 02:31 PM, Jussi Kukkonen wrote:
> > Piglit was removed because the current version was making sdk
> > images too large. This patchset reduces the installed size by 1.5GB
> > and adds piglit back to core-tools-testapps.
> > 
> > Running piglit still requires the same amount of space so in practice
> > this is useful for installed images only.
> > 
> > Q: Do I need to declare a runtime dependency that typically comes
> > from busybox (tar)?
> 
> Yes, because some people try to eliminate busybox from their image.

How would one express such a dependency though, given that it could come from 
tar or busybox? "Virtual" runtime dependencies aren't allowed except through 
our somewhat awkward VIRTUAL-RUNTIME convention, but that probably isn't 
warranted here.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
-- 
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 0/2] Re-add piglit to sdk images

2016-10-18 Thread Randy MacLeod 

On 2016-10-14 02:31 PM, Jussi Kukkonen wrote:

Piglit was removed because the current version was making sdk
images too large. This patchset reduces the installed size by 1.5GB
and adds piglit back to core-tools-testapps.

Running piglit still requires the same amount of space so in practice
this is useful for installed images only.

Q: Do I need to declare a runtime dependency that typically comes
from busybox (tar)?


Yes, because some people try to eliminate busybox from their image.
--
# Randy MacLeod. SMTS, Linux, Wind River
Direct: 613.963.1350 | 350 Terry Fox Drive, Suite 200, Ottawa, ON, 
Canada, K2K 2W5

--
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core